Advertising

Rarely have the reviews for a tennis match been revised as rapidly and drastically as those given to the 2012 Australian Open men’s final. Immediately after Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal finished their exhausted, well-past-midnight, post-match speeches inside Rod Laver Arena, a hushed question began to be asked in the press room next door: “Was this the greatest tennis match of all time?”

Jon Wertheim of Sports Illustrated, author of Strokes of Genius, about the last GMOAT, the 2008 Wimbledon men's final, wondered on Twitter if that match had been surpassed, and if he had written his book too soon. Steve Flink, a tennis historian who was about to release a book called The Greatest Tennis Matches of All Time, added a last-minute chapter about Nole-Rafa Down Under. He listed it as the seventh best in history, ahead of such esteemed epics as Pancho Gonzalez’s two-day win over Charlie Pasarell at Wimbledon in 1969 and the year-end shootout in 1996 between Pete Sampras and Boris Becker in Hannover, Germany. Meanwhile, Djokovic, who won 5-7, 6-4, 6-2, 6-7 (5), 7-5, told Nadal on the trophy stand that, “We made history.” Afterward, he posed with the match clock, which read 5:53. It was the longest Grand Slam final ever, and the longest match in Australian Open history. Djokovic and Nadal seemed to have played one for the ages that night in Melbourne.

Within a few days, though, there was dissension in the tennis ranks. That number, 5:53, the doubters said, was nothing to be awed by; the match was only that long because Novak and Rafa took too much time in between points. As for the style of play, it was “brutal” rather than brilliant, and the endless rallies only proved that nobody knows how to get to the net anymore. Djokovic-Nadal was suddenly a symbol of everything that was wrong with modern men’s tennis, a harbinger of bad things to come. By the end of the year, many of the sport’s aficionados had tossed the Aussie Open men’s final into the “overrated” bin.

I can see both sides of this story. I wouldn’t put Nole-Rafa in my 10 best matches of all time, but I wouldn’t call it overrated, either. Yes, it took too long; ESPN’s Kamakshi Tandon calculated that if player had kept to his allotted 20 seconds between points, the match would have been 70 minutes shorter. Chair umpire Pascal Maria mistakenly waited until the second set to warn them about slow play. No matter how good the tennis, it’s too much to ask fans to sit through nearly six hours of it to find out who wins. And yes, neither player served and volleyed at all. Djokovic, in one of the year’s best lines, even apologized to Rod Laver himself for it in his winner’s speech. “We are running around the baseline,” he said to the 73-year-old legend, who was in the stands. “I’m sorry about that.”

But I don’t agree that this was dull, or even one-dimensional, tennis, or that today's players should be criticized for being “physical,” as if that’s somehow not in the proper genteel tennis tradition. What I think the doubters really missed in this match was the presence of Roger Federer. I like Federer-Nadal and Federer-Djokovic matches as well; as I wrote last week, I still think Roger-Rafa is the most entertaining match-up of them all. But Nadal and Djokovic always put on their own unique show. It’s physical, it’s noisy, it takes a long time, but to this tennis fan’s eyes, it’s gutsy and graceful, too.

Rafa-Nole in Oz was an Epic, with all of the winding drama, technical proficiency, and self-indulgent lulls that we associate with that genre. Here’s a look back at 22 minutes out of the original 353. The dissenters should be happy: Through the magic of YouTube, there’s no time between points at all.

Watching these two rally for the first time in six months, I wonder if it’s the simple fact that one player if a lefty and the other is a righty that keeps them from getting boring to me. Sometimes Djokovic and Andy Murray, both righties, can look a little too similar in their baseline encounters. Rafa and Novak are always distinct, the spin of their shots always hooking against each other.

Advertising

“Vintage Nadal,” we hear one of the Aussie commentators say after Rafa stretches for a get, puts the ball at Djokovic’s feet, and wins the point with a backhand pass. During the clay stretch last spring, Tennis Channel commentator Chris Wilkinson pointed out that this is an underrated skill of Nadal’s. It’s not just that he gets to balls you think he can’t get, Wilkinson said, it’s that he also puts them in difficult places for his opponent. It’s true here, and there’s no better example of it than a shot we looked at last week: the lob that Nadal dropped on the baseline when he was down break point in the final game against Federer in the semis in Australia.

Down a break point in the first set against Djokovic, Nadal tries to go up the middle with his first serve. This is a standard play of his against Federer; after serving 20 straight times out wide to Federer’s weaker backhand in the ad court, he’ll cross him up by sending one down the T on a crucial point. That doesn’t work against Djokovic, who doesn’t have an obvious weaker wing to attack. When Rafa goes down the T here, Djokovic is all over it with his return.

Advertising

During this match, I kept thinking about the parallel—or triangular—dynamics between Nadal-Federer and Djokovic-Nadal. This is what I wrote afterward:

“Nadal uses his high, heavy, lefty forehand to Federer’s one-handed backhand as his fail-safe backup. Djokovic uses his high, heavy, forehand to Nadal’s weaker backhand as his fail-safe backup.

Against Djokovic, Nadal, so sure of his game plan against Federer, appears to have little idea how to construct points or where to start. Rafa can’t identify a weak spot, because there isn’t one. In some ways, Djokovic, who is best on hard courts and whose shots move through the court much more easily, returns Nadal to his early days as a clay-court specialist.

Nobody can exploit Nadal's biggest weakness, his serve, like Djokovic, who owns the best return in the game. Rafa was so amazed by this shot that he burst out in praise of it tonight, without being asked. 'Is something unbelievable how he returns, no? His return is probably one of the best of history.'

When Federer plays Nadal, Federer’s fans ask, 'Why isn’t he more aggressive? Why doesn’t he do this, or that, or something else?' It looks like he should be winning. When Nadal plays Djokovic, Nadal’s fans ask the same exasperated questions. It’s not so easy. Djokovic hits with deceptive weight and accuracy, and he’s better than anyone at forcing Nadal to hit backhands. He’s always going to have the advantage when he does that.

When Nadal plays Federer, Rafa can play his game while his opponent must find a solution. When Nadal plays Djokovic, the roles are reversed. It's Nole's who's comfortable, and Rafa who's searching.”

The first set alone has at least four momentum shifts, but the match is won by Nole, and lost by Rafa, in the final game of the second set, with Nadal serving at 4-5. Rafa had just broken Djokovic at 5-3; it appeared as if he might come back to steal the second set and build a seemingly insurmountable lead. At 30-30, though, Djokovic hits a brilliant backhand winner. At 30-40, Nadal double faults. It’s one set each.

At this point, the head-to-head between these two kicks in. Djokovic had won their last six matches, and it shows. He’s full of confidence through the third and most of the fourth sets, while Nadal is as disconsolate as I've ever seen him. With Rafa down 3-4, 0-40 in the fourth, the camera pans from Djokovic to the champion’s trophy. It’s almost his.

Advertising

It’s amazing to hear Mats Wilander urge Nadal to go for winners earlier in points, because Rafa can’t hang in the long rallies against Djokovic. I never thought I would hear those words spoken about an opponent of Nadal’s.

Still, there are at least two more twists to go in this saga. Nadal saves all three break points, holds for 4-4, forces a tiebreaker, and comes back to win it 7-5. Djokovic got tight trying to finish the match off, and when Nadal executes a spinning forehand winner early in the fifth set, it looks like he’s going to come back for what might have been his most unlikely, and greatest, victory.

Nadal breaks for 4-2. I remember the roar from the crowd when he hit a forehand winner on the first point of that game. The Aussies were ready to push him across the finish line. Then it was Rafa’s turn to get tight. We miss the key shot here—at 30-15, Nadal ran forward for a simple backhand pass; even Djokovic seemed ready to concede the point. Instead, Nadal pushed the ball wide. He never recovered.

From there a nervous Rafa retreated farther behind the baseline and went to his weaker, safer, floating slice backhand. It was never going to work, and Djokovic methodically took advantage. Still, there was tremendous tennis to be had all the way to the end. At 4-4 in the fifth, Nadal won a 32-stroke rally that put Djokovic on his back.

Advertising

The physicality of the match should only make us credit Djokovic’s achievement more. Two nights earlier he had beaten Andy Murray 7-5 in the fifth; now he had done it again.

Rafa walked to the net looking crushed, but he came through with one of the best loser’s press conferences I’ve ever heard. Here’s what I wrote about it at 6:00 that morning:

"I wondered how Nadal would get that missed pass out of his mind. I wondered if he would break down in tears on the trophy stand.

We got none of that. What we got instead were words that spoke to why you play the sport in the first place—for matches like this, even when you lose them. In my favorite moment of the evening, Rafa raised and shook his second-place plate with sad pride.

'When you are with passion for the game,' Nadal said, 'when you are ready to compete, you are able to suffer and enjoy suffering, no?'

But it isn’t just a feeling you have on a tennis court, and it isn’t something, in Rafa’s mind, that only star athletes can understand. It’s there for anyone who tries for something greater.

'I don’t know if I express it very well,' he went on, 'but is something that maybe you understand. So today I had this feeling, and is really a good one. I enjoyed. I suffered during the match, but I enjoyed all the troubles that I had during all the match.

'I enjoyed. I tried to be there, to find solutions all the time. I played a lot with my heart and lot with my mind, that’s something that is nice to be around, and [it’s not just about] tennis.'

**

Nole was gracious in his winner’s speech, turning to Nadal to tell him, “We made history.” The words made sense, because this match was as much about sports, and what they put you through, as it was about winners and losers.

Before he got up there, Djokovic had torn his shirt off and screamed. Was it too much? Some thought so. But after what he had been through to win, I could understand it. He had played tennis for nearly six hours. He had outlasted one of the sport’s greatest lasters. And it was 2:00 in the morning.

Steve Tignor's Top 10 Matches of 2012:

No. 1:The Miracle on Grass: Lukas Rosol d. Rafael Nadal

        No. 2: <em>The Struggle Down Under:</em> Novak Djokovic d. Rafael Nadal  
        No. 3: <em>Olympian Efforts:</em> Roger Federer d. Juan Martin del Potro  
        No. 4: <em>Wooing Them:</em> Victoria Azarenka d. Sam Stosur  
        No. 5: <em>Tightrope Walk Across Paris:</em> Novak Djokovic d. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga  
        No. 6: <em>Winning Like It's 1999:</em> Serena Williams d. Victoria Azarenka  
        No. 7: <em>Fireworks:</em> Rafael Nadal d. Roger Federer  
        No. 8: <em>Sturm and Drang:</em> Angelique Kerber d. Sabine Lisicki  
        No. 9: <em>Sculpting a Strange Masterpiece:</em> Bernard Tomic d. Alexandr Dolgopolov<em>*  

No. 10: Stunner in Paris:* Virginie Razzano d. Serena Williams